Advance legal columnist: A flagrant civil wrong in the name of civil rights

Associated PressThis photo combo shows photos of George Zimmerman that have been released since he shot and killed 17-year-old Trayon Martin on Feb. 26. From left, a 2005 booking photo provided by the Orange County Jail; an undated but recent photo taken from the Orlando Sentinel's website, and Wednesday's booking mug provided by the Sanford Police.

For those unencumbered by biases, preconceptions or political agendas, no rational analysis of the Trayvon Martin case is possible until all the facts have been ascertained.

Unfortunately, self-styled civil rights leaders and those who blindly follow them are not interested in the facts. From the outset, they’ve been screaming at the top of their lungs for George Zimmerman to be convicted. And until he is, “No Justice, No Peace!” is their thuggish threat to the judicial process and to everybody else’s domestic tranquility.

In their racially tinged myopia, a de-facto public lynching is the only acceptable result, and an asinine chant is their tool for making it happen.

How ironic that those purporting to act in the name of civil rights are hell-bent on perpetuating the gravest of civil wrongs. Nor should it come as any surprise that they’re being aided by media outlets routinely amenable to fanning their inflammatory rhetoric.

For example, the Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism found that between March 19 and March 28, MSNBC devoted almost half its airtime to the Trayvon Martin case. Stoking the fires of outrage, the network repeatedly focused on supposed prior instances of racial injustice in Sanford, Fla.

Similarly, despite all the pressing national and international news developments, the case garnered a startling 40 percent of the airtime on CNN during that same period.

It is hardly a coincidence that the two documented instances of gross misreporting operated to further the cause of those who had already put a bull’s-eye on Zimmerman’s back. Thus, CNN initially reported that his 911 call contained the phrase “f---ing coon” when, in fact, he actually said “f---ing cold.” Similarly, NBC broadcast a version of the 911 tape that had been edited to make it appear that Zimmerman’s interaction with Martin was racially motivated.

Would MSNBC, CNN or the national media in general be paying so much attention had Trayvon Martin been white and George Zimmerman black? Would there be marches and demonstrations and threats of “No Justice, No Peace!”?

The answer is obvious, of course. But for those who insist on having it spelled out, here it is: David James. Never heard of him? Well, that’s the point.

DOUBLE STANDARD

On Sept. 26, 2010, James, who is white and an Iraq war veteran, was shooting hoops with his 8-year-old daughter on a basketball court in Valrico, Fla. When a 14-year-old boy asked James for permission to skateboard on the court, Trevor Dooley, a 69-year-old black man, shouted from outside his garage that skateboarding was not allowed.

James then called out to Dooley, “Show me the sign.” Two individuals who had been playing tennis nearby testified that Dooley then started toward the court with a gun sticking out of his waistband.

When Dooley pulled out the gun, James grabbed his hand. As the two men struggled and fell to the ground, Dooley shot James through the heart. He died within seconds in front of his young daughter.

Currently facing a manslaughter charge, Dooley is basing his defense on Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law even though his version of events is disputed by the testimony of independent witnesses.

Dooley, however, is getting his day in court, clothed by the presumption of innocence. Which is exactly how it’s supposed to be in the United States unless, of course, your name is George Zimmerman.

Last week, Angela Corey, the special prosecutor named to investigate the Trayvon Martin shooting, announced that Zimmerman was being charged with second-degree murder. The action suggests that her real goals are to appease the “No Justice, No Peace!” lynch mobs and to solidify her political future.

Not only does her affidavit of probable cause fail to set forth the elements of the crime, it leaves the reader clueless on the pivotal issue of who attacked whom. Its allegation that “Zimmerman confronted Martin and a struggle ensued” says essentially nothing because the nature of the confrontation is undefined.

The affidavit also fails to address or even disclose any of the objective evidence favorable to Zimmerman. Thus, it simply ignores the grass stains on the back of his shirt, the bruises on his head, his bloodied nose and the witnesses who paint Martin as the aggressor. The affidavit is thus not only incomplete but unethical.

Under law, probable cause exists where reasonably trustworthy facts and circumstances exist that would convince an ordinarily prudent person that the crime charged has been committed. Although the standard is not a heavy one, the affidavit submitted by Corey doesn’t come close to satisfying it.

That, however, doesn’t mean that it won’t fly. The lynch-mob mentality that has enveloped this case is such that only a fiercely conscientious judge and a panel of exceptional jurors will have the courage to evaluate it fairly. By any measure, that’s outrageous.

None of which is to say that George Zimmerman is innocent of any wrongdoing. He is, however, entitled to due process of law, just like any other accused individual; just like Trevor Dooley, for example.